Dynadot: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Skizzmcgree (talk | contribs) Unnecessary quote saying how impactful the decision was |
m Minor editing along with removal of some biased language. |
||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
In February 2008, the wikileaks.org [[domain name]] was taken offline after the Swiss Bank [[Julius Baer]] sued [[WikiLeaks]] and Dynadot, the wikileaks.org [[domain registrar]], in [[Government of California#The Superior Courts of California|a court in]] California, United States, and obtained a permanent [[injunction]] ordering the shutdown.<ref name=injunction>{{cite press release | title=Wikileaks.org under injunction | url=https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080306005837/https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction | archive-date=6 March 2008 | publisher=WikiLeaks | date=18 February 2008 | access-date=28 February 2008}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.cnet.com/news/wikileaks-domain-name-yanked-in-spat-over-leaked-documents/|title=Wikileaks domain name yanked in spat over leaked documents|last=McCullagh|first=Declan|date=19 February 2008|work=CNET|access-date=29 May 2018|language=en}}</ref> WikiLeaks had hosted allegations of illegal activities at the bank's [[Cayman Islands]] branch.<ref name=injunction/> WikiLeaks' U.S. Registrar, Dynadot, complied with the order by removing its DNS entries. However, the website remained accessible via its numeric IP address, and online activists immediately mirrored WikiLeaks at dozens of alternative websites worldwide.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/free-speech-has-a-number-888013160/|title=Free Speech Has A Number: 88.80.13.160|date=20 February 2008|work=[[CBS News]]|access-date=29 May 2018|language=en}}</ref> |
In February 2008, the wikileaks.org [[domain name]] was taken offline after the Swiss Bank [[Julius Baer]] sued [[WikiLeaks]] and Dynadot, the wikileaks.org [[domain registrar]], in [[Government of California#The Superior Courts of California|a court in]] California, United States, and obtained a permanent [[injunction]] ordering the shutdown.<ref name=injunction>{{cite press release | title=Wikileaks.org under injunction | url=https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080306005837/https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction | archive-date=6 March 2008 | publisher=WikiLeaks | date=18 February 2008 | access-date=28 February 2008}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.cnet.com/news/wikileaks-domain-name-yanked-in-spat-over-leaked-documents/|title=Wikileaks domain name yanked in spat over leaked documents|last=McCullagh|first=Declan|date=19 February 2008|work=CNET|access-date=29 May 2018|language=en}}</ref> WikiLeaks had hosted allegations of illegal activities at the bank's [[Cayman Islands]] branch.<ref name=injunction/> WikiLeaks' U.S. Registrar, Dynadot, complied with the order by removing its DNS entries. However, the website remained accessible via its numeric IP address, and online activists immediately mirrored WikiLeaks at dozens of alternative websites worldwide.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/free-speech-has-a-number-888013160/|title=Free Speech Has A Number: 88.80.13.160|date=20 February 2008|work=[[CBS News]]|access-date=29 May 2018|language=en}}</ref> |
||
The [[American Civil Liberties Union]] and the [[Electronic Frontier Foundation]] filed a motion protesting the |
The [[American Civil Liberties Union]] and the [[Electronic Frontier Foundation]] filed a motion protesting the action taken against WikiLeaks. The [[Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press]] assembled a coalition of media and press that filed an [[amicus curiae]] brief on WikiLeaks' behalf. The coalition included major U.S. newspaper publishers and press organizations, such as the [[American Society of News Editors]], the [[Associated Press]], the [[Citizen Media Law Project]], the [[E. W. Scripps Company]], the [[Gannett Company]], the [[Hearst Corporation]], the ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'', the [[National Newspaper Publishers Association]], the [[Newspaper Association of America]] and the [[Society of Professional Journalists]]. The coalition requested to be heard as a friend of the court to call attention to relevant points of law that it believed the court had overlooked (on the grounds that WikiLeaks had not appeared in court to defend itself, and that no First Amendment issues had yet been raised before the court). Amongst other things, the coalition argued that:<ref name="autogenerated1">{{cite web|url=http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1039527/judge-rethinks-wikileaks|title=Judge reverses Wikileaks injunction|last=Orion|first=Egan|date=2 March 2008|website=www.theinquirer.net|publisher=[[The Inquirer]]|url-status=unfit|archive-url=https://archive.today/20190908034836/https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1039527/judge-rethinks-wikileaks|archive-date=8 September 2019|access-date=23 September 2009}}</ref>{{unreliable source?|date=January 2017}}<blockquote>"WikiLeaks provides a forum for dissidents and whistleblowers across the globe to post documents, but the Dynadot injunction imposes a prior restraint that drastically curtails access to Wikileaks from the Internet based on a limited number of postings challenged by Plaintiffs. The Dynadot injunction therefore violates the bedrock principle that an injunction cannot enjoin all communication by a publisher or other speaker."<ref>{{cite web |last1=Media coalition |title=Document 62 |url=https://www.rcfp.org/news/documents/20080229-amicusbrie.pdf |website=Julius Baer v. WikiLeaks |publisher=Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press |access-date=2 June 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081127152524/https://www.rcfp.org/news/documents/20080229-amicusbrie.pdf |archive-date=27 November 2008 |date=26 February 2008}}</ref></blockquote> |
||
Judge Jeffrey White, who initially issued the injunction, vacated it on 29 February 2008, citing [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|First Amendment]] concerns and questions about legal [[jurisdiction]].<ref>{{cite news | author=Philipp Gollner | work=Reuters| url=https://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUSN2927431720080229 | title=Judge reverses ruling in Julius Baer leak case | date=29 February 2008 | access-date=1 March 2008}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/05/bank-asks-judge-to-dismiss-its-suit-against-wikileaks-site/|title=Bank Moves to Withdraw Its Suit Against Wikileaks Site|last=Glater|first=Jonathan D.|date=5 March 2008|website=New York Times (Bits Blog)|language=en-US|access-date=29 May 2018}}</ref> WikiLeaks was thus able to bring its site [[online]] again. The bank dropped the case on 5 March 2008.<ref>{{cite web |
|||
|url=http://www.informationweek.com/management/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=206902154 |
|url=http://www.informationweek.com/management/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=206902154 |
||
|title=Swiss Bank Abandons Lawsuit Against WikiLeaks: The wiki had posted financial documents it said proved tax evasion by Bank Julius Baer's clients |
|title=Swiss Bank Abandons Lawsuit Against WikiLeaks: The wiki had posted financial documents it said proved tax evasion by Bank Julius Baer's clients |
||
Revision as of 01:32, 24 August 2022
 | This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages)
|
Type of site | Private Company |
|---|---|
| Founded | 2002 |
| Predecessor(s) | INamePro, LLC |
| Headquarters | , |
| Area served | Worldwide |
| Founder(s) | Todd Han |
| Key people | Todd Han (Founder) & (President) |
| Industry | Domain Registrar |
| Products | Web Services |
| URL | www |
Dynadot is a privately held ICANN accredited domain name registrar and web hosting company founded by software engineer Todd Han in 2002. Dynadot's headquarters is established in San Mateo, California, with offices in Zhengzhou and Beijing, China, as well as Toronto, Canada.
History
Dynadot was founded in 2002, in San Mateo, California, by Todd Han, a software engineer. Originally called INamePro, LLC, the organization changed its name to Dynadot in 2003. Han was the sole operator of the company during the first three years of its launch, and he hired the company's first employee in 2005.[1]
Bank Julius Baer lawsuit
 | This section may lend undue weight to certain ideas, incidents, or controversies. (January 2017) |
In February 2008, the wikileaks.org domain name was taken offline after the Swiss Bank Julius Baer sued WikiLeaks and Dynadot, the wikileaks.org domain registrar, in a court in California, United States, and obtained a permanent injunction ordering the shutdown.[2][3] WikiLeaks had hosted allegations of illegal activities at the bank's Cayman Islands branch.[2] WikiLeaks' U.S. Registrar, Dynadot, complied with the order by removing its DNS entries. However, the website remained accessible via its numeric IP address, and online activists immediately mirrored WikiLeaks at dozens of alternative websites worldwide.[4]
The American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a motion protesting the action taken against WikiLeaks. The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press assembled a coalition of media and press that filed an amicus curiae brief on WikiLeaks' behalf. The coalition included major U.S. newspaper publishers and press organizations, such as the American Society of News Editors, the Associated Press, the Citizen Media Law Project, the E. W. Scripps Company, the Gannett Company, the Hearst Corporation, the Los Angeles Times, the National Newspaper Publishers Association, the Newspaper Association of America and the Society of Professional Journalists. The coalition requested to be heard as a friend of the court to call attention to relevant points of law that it believed the court had overlooked (on the grounds that WikiLeaks had not appeared in court to defend itself, and that no First Amendment issues had yet been raised before the court). Amongst other things, the coalition argued that:[5][unreliable source?]
"WikiLeaks provides a forum for dissidents and whistleblowers across the globe to post documents, but the Dynadot injunction imposes a prior restraint that drastically curtails access to Wikileaks from the Internet based on a limited number of postings challenged by Plaintiffs. The Dynadot injunction therefore violates the bedrock principle that an injunction cannot enjoin all communication by a publisher or other speaker."[6]
Judge Jeffrey White, who initially issued the injunction, vacated it on 29 February 2008, citing First Amendment concerns and questions about legal jurisdiction.[7][8] WikiLeaks was thus able to bring its site online again. The bank dropped the case on 5 March 2008.[9][unreliable source?] The judge also denied the bank's request for an order prohibiting the website's publication.[5][unreliable source?]
Notes
- ^ "About Dynadot". Retrieved 2011-08-25.
- ^ a b "Wikileaks.org under injunction" (Press release). WikiLeaks. 18 February 2008. Archived from the original on 6 March 2008. Retrieved 28 February 2008.
- ^ McCullagh, Declan (19 February 2008). "Wikileaks domain name yanked in spat over leaked documents". CNET. Retrieved 29 May 2018.
- ^ "Free Speech Has A Number: 88.80.13.160". CBS News. 20 February 2008. Retrieved 29 May 2018.
- ^ a b Orion, Egan (2 March 2008). "Judge reverses Wikileaks injunction". www.theinquirer.net. The Inquirer. Archived from the original on 8 September 2019. Retrieved 23 September 2009.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link) - ^ Media coalition (26 February 2008). "Document 62" (PDF). Julius Baer v. WikiLeaks. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 November 2008. Retrieved 2 June 2019.
- ^ Philipp Gollner (29 February 2008). "Judge reverses ruling in Julius Baer leak case". Reuters. Retrieved 1 March 2008.
- ^ Glater, Jonathan D. (5 March 2008). "Bank Moves to Withdraw Its Suit Against Wikileaks Site". New York Times (Bits Blog). Retrieved 29 May 2018.
- ^ Claburn, Thomas (6 March 2008). "Swiss Bank Abandons Lawsuit Against WikiLeaks: The wiki had posted financial documents it said proved tax evasion by Bank Julius Baer's clients". InformationWeek.
